If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Websleuths News

Join Websleuths Radio for the final discussion of THE KILLING SEASON
with Josh Zemam, Rachel Mills and special guests including Bob Kolker author of Lost Girls

I've been wanting to say something for a long time now. I think now is a good time.

I would like to thank the owners and administrators here at Websleuths for providing us with such a wonderful place to discuss many topics/cases.

I would like to thank all of the moderators here, because I know their job is not easy. I'm sure at times they must feel unappreciated. I want all of the moderators to know that you are appreciated for the tremendous amount of time that you spend each day to make this site a safe and friendly place to voice our opinions.

To all of my fellow posters. Thank you all for caring so much, it doesn't matter which case, just the fact that you are all caring people. I know there are times when we all disagree and times when we all agree. There are times when we should take a step back from our computers and cool off. (That would make the moderators job a little easier) What we all need to remember is to respect our fellow posters opinions. I've met some wonderful people at this site. I, for one, would be lost without Websleuths and have enjoyed many hours just reading.

From my heart that is all that I wanted to say.

That's nice Zak. The mods have really been working overtime in here and my hat is off to them as well. I just cruise in -create chaos and then am on my way.
But the admin and mods that do tend to this forum are incredible.
Of course the members are awesome and that goes without saying. The forum is what you all make it.

Thank you JBean. So, he says "that is going to be due". If you combine the two statements, the one about the parents mortgaging their house and this one, maybe the parents were waiting on a check and the bondsman had a promissory note?

Very puzzling - why wouldn't GZ just have the money taken out of the account? Perhaps only he could draw it out? Transferring the funds would take a few days, at least, so maybe the $5,000 came from viable funds in his possession. O'Mara is too ambiguous, IMO.

Transferring funds is done online now. A few days is from 20 years ago. I literally takes minutes now. I do it all the time. jmo

I've been wanting to say something for a long time now. I think now is a good time.

I would like to thank the owners and administrators here at Websleuths for providing us with such a wonderful place to discuss many topics/cases.

I would like to thank all of the moderators here, because I know their job is not easy. I'm sure at times they must feel unappreciated. I want all of the moderators to know that you are appreciated for the tremendous amount of time that you spend each day to make this site a safe and friendly place to voice our opinions.

To all of my fellow posters. Thank you all for caring so much, it doesn't matter which case, just the fact that you are all caring people. I know there are times when we all disagree and times when we all agree. There are times when we should take a step back from our computers and cool off. (That would make the moderators job a little easier) What we all need to remember is to respect our fellow posters opinions. I've met some wonderful people at this site. I, for one, would be lost without Websleuths and have enjoyed many hours just reading.

I've been wanting to say something for a long time now. I think now is a good time.

I would like to thank the owners and administrators here at Websleuths for providing us with such a wonderful place to discuss many topics/cases.

I would like to thank all of the moderators here, because I know their job is not easy. I'm sure at times they must feel unappreciated. I want all of the moderators to know that you are appreciated for the tremendous amount of time that you spend each day to make this site a safe and friendly place to voice our opinions.

To all of my fellow posters. Thank you all for caring so much, it doesn't matter which case, just the fact that you are all caring people. I know there are times when we all disagree and times when we all agree. There are times when we should take a step back from our computers and cool off. (That would make the moderators job a little easier) What we all need to remember is to respect our fellow posters opinions. I've met some wonderful people at this site. I, for one, would be lost without Websleuths and have enjoyed many hours just reading.

Thank you JBean. So, he says "that is going to be due". If you combine the two statements, the one about the parents mortgaging their house and this one, maybe the parents were waiting on a check and the bondsman had a promissory note?

Very puzzling - why wouldn't GZ just have the money taken out of the account? Perhaps only he could draw it out? Transferring the funds would take a few days, at least, so maybe the $5,000 came from viable funds in his possession. O'Mara is too ambiguous, IMO.

bbm
Yeah I concur.
It seems that the family was trying to raise the entire 150k,despite MOM telling them that they should just get a bondsman and pay 10%. Now, remember if they had paid the entire 150 and he fulfilled his court obligations- they would get that whole amount back; so their cost would be zero at the end of the day.

By using the bondsman they will never see that 15k again. So, I understand why they did not want to spend the 15k but it apparently it just wasn't practical and/or they could not or decided not to pull it together.

Personally, I think there was a lot of confusion over that account and that is part of the problem.

Plus GZ had no hair. How do you bang someone's head continually on the pavement when they have no hair without having injuries to your hands? I think that was the issue with no injuries to TM's hands. He would have had to have held the sides of GZ's head with his hands opening them up to injuries. Did he grab him by the ears???? The nose maybe (I think the nose would be too slippery to hold onto if he grabbed it to be honest). The story does not match the evidence. Plain and simple. jmo

BBM

I've asked that same question, what was he holding onto when he was supposedly bashing his head into the ground when GZ had no hair to hold on to? If he was holding on to the the sides of his heads, there would have been scrape marks on Trayvon's hands.

To respond to another one of your posts without quoting a second time, as far as what LE wrote on the police report that night regarding preventing a crime, it's really neither here nor there, they only had GZ's word to go on. And we all heard GZ's 911 call, no where in it does he ever say that Trayvon was actually committing any crime, unless walking while "looking about" is considered a crime. And I've said this before so I'm repeating myself here, there really wasn't much else that GZ could say other than it was all self defense, he certainly wasn't going to say he was guilty and he certainly knew that a dead boy could no longer dispute anything he says.

I saw that. I couldn't help but wonder, however, what did they consider important enough to spend the remaining $49K on? As O'Mara said, the bond fee would certainly have been a legitimate defense fund expense.

I think they are trying to navigate a volatile situation and they have no idea what to do.
JMHO of course.

"John" said that a man wearing a red sweater was on bottom. Neither Trayvon nor Zimmerman were wearing a red sweater so that makes me question if "John" really was close enough to see clearly or not. Personally I feel that if "John" can not be accurate in what either was wearing then I have to look at his entire account as questionable.

LOL ~ OT
My 14 year old daughter was in the kitchen getting something to drink and saw on the fridge where I have been pulled for jury duty for next month. She came into the office and told me "Momma, those people are gonna hate you on that jury!" I asked her why and she said "Because you don't give up on anything and if you don't agree with them you will tell them so!" I think she has come to that conclussion because of my time spent on here at WS and from hearing me have "debates" with hubby over cases. LOL

I'm sure you'll be fine. I've been on a couple of juries and was well aware that my responsibilities there were somewhat different from the casual conversations/debates we have here. I had no problem deliberating in a civil and lawful manner.

"John" said that a man wearing a red sweater was on bottom. Neither Trayvon nor Zimmerman were wearing a red sweater so that makes me question if "John" really was close enough to see clearly or not. Personally I feel that if "John" can not be accurate in what either was wearing then I have to look at his entire account as questionable.

MOO

Throw in that I believe the Officer taking his statement was leading him and coaxing him on what he saw and I think his testimony is about worthless. IMO

I read that differently. I thought he had paid the full 15k-but only used 5k out of the paypal account towards it.

oh here this might help:

Last week the judge let out Zimmerman on $150,000 bail, of which his family spent three days scrambling to post the $15,000 needed for the bail bondsman. They even mortgaged one of their properties to come up with themoney.Itís unclear why they did not use more of the PayPal funds.

It has been asked again and again why GZ let his parents put up their home as collateral when he had cash in the paypal account.

The answer is simple, I suspect: GZ intends to show up for trial, so he knows his parents' home isn't in danger. Any cash from the paypal account that he used for bond would not also be available for legal expenses.

As handled, there's a temporary lien on the property and plenty of money to pay for experts, tests, etc.

My comments are in red. I'd also like to mention that my husband was in a accident, hit by a vehicle and thrown 10-15' landing on pavement surrounded by railroad ties. His head hit a railroad tie and landed on the pavement. GZ had more of a laceration on his head than my husband had. Hubby's forehead laceration was about an inch long and no stitches. He did have road rash on his arm and knee. Hubby was knocked unconscious and ended up with TBI. So I don't think we can look at one head injury and expect all to look the same.

I had missed until now that the FBI analyzed the scream and it was inconclusive or it was not TMs voice. I wonder if they used a sample of TMs voice in addition to GZs.

"John" said that a man wearing a red sweater was on bottom. Neither Trayvon nor Zimmerman were wearing a red sweater so that makes me question if "John" really was close enough to see clearly or not. Personally I feel that if "John" can not be accurate in what either was wearing then I have to look at his entire account as questionable.

MOO

There are still only two people involved in the scuffle, and if Jonn saw the one on top dead in the grass and George is still alive, George would have to have been the one on the bottom yelling for help when John was outside, regardless of whether he was wearing a red jacket, fleece or sweater. Particularly since there's no dispute that Trayvon had on a gray sweatshirt with nothing red about it.

Personally, I think splitting hairs among the words sweater, jacket, fleece or whatever is just that - splitting hairs. The question is whether it was red and whether the person wearing it was on the bottom. Nonetheless, it still begs the question of how the altercation started in the first place and there, we have two witnesses (George or his family member and the gf) who agree that mildly confrontational words were exchanged. Imo, that's where the focus should be. How did both George and Travyon respond to those mildly confrontational words that both sides agree were spoken. Did Trayvon attack George because he was scared or po'd or both, or did George attack him and/or show him his weapon. Personally, I don't think we will ever know the answer to that question with certainty. That's why I think that there may be sufficient evidence to support a finding by the court that the preponderence establishes immunity at an SYG preliminary hearing, and certainly that the prosecution won't be able to prove murder 2 beyond a reasonable doubt unless there is some very significant evidence of which we are not yet aware. And that's true, imo, regardless of whether George is actually guilty or not. jmo